home First Round Table: Lords of Palenque Page 73       


The evidence in favor of interpretation as a single individual is as follows:

1. The two occur in the same text, the Stucco Tablet of Temple 18; each occurs on one of the paired alfardas  from the Tower Courtyard of the Palace (Lord Chaac is named on the 'Orator' Tablet and Chac-Zutz' on the 'Scribe' Tablet).

2. The two personages share certain titles, such as the u-cab .

3. It is possible that the 9 Ik 5 Kayab date is an accession date 'shared' by both Lord Chaac and Chac-Zutz'.

4. Both appear to be associated with the same female.

5. Chac-Zutz has no 'Lord prefix', yet all the other rulers of Palenque discussed in this paper do: it could thus be argued that 'Chac-Zutz'' is a secondary name of Lord Chaac. The Tablet of the Slaves was found in a secondary group well away from the area which contains the accession and death monuments of the other rulers and the tablet may well be a secondary text dedicated to the 3-katun anniversary of birth. If the tablet is celebrating other than a major event and positioned in a major monumental group, the use of names with the 'Lord prefix' may not have been a mandatory convention.

6. The text records the capture of one or more persons, and may be concerned primarily with the warrior aspects of the ruler. As 'captor' the name of rulers may not have required the 'Lord Prefix'.

7. On the Tablet of the Slaves we find a pattern very similar to that discussed earlier in which an 'age Distance Number' is followed by 'birth', name, and birth dates, then by 'accession', name and accession date (figure 11). On the Tablet of the Slaves, B3-C1, we find:

B3   11 tuns (??), 2 katuns Distance Number?

A4 'birth-x-bat'

B4   (9.11.18.9.17) 7 Caban 15 Kayab (birth date)

A5 'accession' (almost certainly)

B5 ??

C1   (9.14.10.4.2) 9 Ik 5 Kayab (accession date)

The interval between 9.11.18.9.17 and 9.14.10.4.2 is 2.11.12.5, but as the Tablet of the Slaves is an extremely abbreviated text, it is possible that the Distance Number is recorded in an abbreviated form:

B4   (9.11.18.9.17) 7 Caban 15 Kayab

B3   2.11.(12.5) Approximate Distance Number. Add:

C1   (9.14.10.4.2) 9 Ik 5 Kayab

If the above reading is correct we do find a correspondence with the three other texts mentioned and the accession date 9.14.10.4.2 91k 5 Kayab does refer to Chac Zutz'. If the 2.11.(0.0) Distance Number is an 'age at accession' record, it must be linked to the 'communal' 91k 5 Kayab date.

8. It is possible that the 8 Ik 7 Yaxkin date represents the adoption of a secondary name by Lord Chaac (namely, 'Chac Zutz'), thus parallelling our tentative suggestion for Lord Hok's adoption of the 'T3' title some 5 1/2 years after his actual accession to power.

Evidence in favor of interpretation as two different individuals is as follows:

1. Since most texts in Palenque mention at least two rulers, the occurrence of Lord Chaac and Chac Zutz' together may have no significance.

2. The shared 'titles' may well be universal ones; the 'u-cab' seems to be one of these (Kelley [1962: 324 and fig. 4]).

3. The 8 Ix 7 Yaxkin date on the Tablet of the Slaves has a very clear 'accession/Chac Zutz' following it. If Lord Chaac and Chac Zutz' are the same person, the later 'accession' record would have to be explained.

4. The association of Lord Chaac and Chac Zutz' with the same woman is no proof that the two men are the same. Likewise the absence of a 'Lord Prefix' to Chac Zutz' does not necessarily mean that he was not a 'lord' in his own right.

5. Lord Chaac definitely has an 'age Distance Number/birth/accession' passage referring to him on the Temple 18 Jambs. The accession date is clearly 9.14.10.4.2 9 Ik 5 Kayab, but the birth date is 9.12.6.5.8 3 Lamat 6 Zac, not 7 Caban 15 Kayab.

Until other texts are found including information on the period from 9.14.10.4.2 to 9.15.0.0.0 or until the known texts are further understood, the question of Lord Chaac and Chac Zutz' as one or two different personages must remain unanswered.

It should also be noted that there are still several gaps in the history of Palenque as we have presented it. There is a short gap between 9.14.8.14.15 and 9.14.10.4.2, in which we feel that Lord Hok's death occurred. A much larger gap occurs between c. 9.15.0.0.0 and 9.16.13.0.7, the date of Lord Kuk's accession; the record is likewise blank after 9.17.13.0.7. It is to be hoped that inscriptions will be found to fill these gaps.

In this paper we have given interpretations of several glyph groups. Our 'T713/757' compound and 'T700 var.' glyph group are continually linked to dates associated with Berlin's 'T644' glyph group for accession. All three compounds can be interpreted as 'accession' in the general sense of the word.

We agree with Berlins' identification of T74.184 as a 'Lord Prefix' and suggest the T1010a and b.184.74 is the 'head variant' of that prefix. The head variant occurs frequently and in every case seems to be directly interchangeable for the prefix.



home First Round Table: Lords of Palenque Page 73